You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Morning versus evening induction of labour for improving outcomes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, February 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1002/14651858.cd007707.pub2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jannet JH Bakker, Birgit Y van der Goes, Maria Pel, Ben Willem J Mol, Joris AM van der Post |
| Abstract |
Induction of labour is a common intervention in obstetric practice. Traditionally, in most hospitals induction of labour with medication starts early in the morning, with the start of the working day for the day shift. In human and animal studies spontaneous onset of labour is proven to have a circadian rhythm with a preference for start of labour in the evening. Moreover, when spontaneous labour starts in the evening, the total duration of labour and delivery shortens and fewer obstetric interventions are needed. Based on these observations one might assume that starting induction of labour in the evening, in harmony with the circadian rhythm of natural birth, is more beneficial for both mother and child. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| Italy | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 4 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 83% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 215 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 214 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 31 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 26 | 12% |
| Researcher | 25 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 25 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 13 | 6% |
| Other | 31 | 14% |
| Unknown | 64 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 77 | 36% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 22 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 3% |
| Psychology | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 26 | 12% |
| Unknown | 69 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 July 2016.
All research outputs
#2,381,184
of 25,477,125 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#4,894
of 13,113 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,833
of 205,436 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#70
of 211 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,477,125 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,113 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 205,436 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 211 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.